JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7851558/mel-kiper-offers-picks-round-2-draft #41 Buffalo Bills Jonathan Martin *, T, Stanford Stock has dipped, but the tools are there. Buffalo can use him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D521646 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I wouldn't hate it, but I think we need a WR more than T, IMO. Tim- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I'd be ok with that. Now that we don't have to worry about our first pick being an immediate playmaker, I'd be all for it if Glenn doesn't fall enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I think that I could live with that depending on who else is available. The kid needs to get some more strength. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7851558/mel-kiper-offers-picks-round-2-draft This and then Quick with our next pick would be a very good day 2 in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I will do cartwheels if we can land Martin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Give that kid a year in a professional nutritional and training program and he's gonna be a fixture at LT. He can move for a man his size. He's got them "athletic feet" or something like whatever Whaley mentioned recently. I wouldn't be too upset. GO BILLS!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 This mock has Hill off the board when we pick but Randle, Jeffrey & Quick all go later in round 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Good pick, although I wish it were Glenn. Unless we keep Fitz upright, it won't matter what WRs we have... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Would love to get Martin at 41! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted April 27, 2012 Author Share Posted April 27, 2012 Don Banks seems to agree: http://www.cnnsi.com/2012/writers/don_banks/04/27/2012.nfl.draft.second.round.mock/index.html 41 Bills OT Jonathan Martin Stanford Sr. 6-6 304 Bills GM Buddy Nix kept talking about needing to come away with a starting left offensive tackle in this draft, and it only took him one round longer than was first expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I wouldn't hate it, but I think we need a WR more than T, IMO. Tim- but i think we can get a real wr in the 3rd, and dont feel the same about tackle - if we are talking filling need. the wr in the 3rd might be closer to ready than whichever OT is there in the second even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Here come the Martin fans... I for one am not one... I wouldn't mind WR or even LB. But if we must go with tackle I take Glenn over Martin in a bird's heartbeat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Don Banks seems to agree: http://www.cnnsi.com/2012/writers/don_banks/04/27/2012.nfl.draft.second.round.mock/index.html His quote is way off base. Buddy has said that we want to add 2 tackles for depth and that they love Chris Hairston as the starer at LT. He never once said we need a starting LT from this draft. I would be happy with this pick, but Banks needs to check his factual accuracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D521646 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 but i think we can get a real wr in the 3rd, and dont feel the same about tackle - if we are talking filling need. the wr in the 3rd might be closer to ready than whichever OT is there in the second even. For the first time in a long time, I feel ho hum about the order of the picks. I think this is a good thing. Yes we could use an OT, yes we could use another WR, yes we could use a CB etc.. I just don't think we're in dire staits for any single position this year, and BPA (Although rather cliche) seems the best approach. I'd prefer Hill over Martin, but like I said I wouldn't mach on 1BD if Nix took him.. Tim- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAinLack. Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) Here come the Martin fans... I for one am not one... I wouldn't mind WR or even LB. But if we must go with tackle I take Glenn over Martin in a bird's heartbeat. Agree, I like the kid from North Carolina, OLB43, Zack Brown! A real nice front seven with this addition. Edited April 27, 2012 by TAinLA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWVABillsFan Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 His quote is way off base. Buddy has said that we want to add 2 tackles for depth and that they love Chris Hairston as the starer at LT. He never once said we need a starting LT from this draft. I would be happy with this pick, but Banks needs to check his factual accuracy. We may not need a starting LT but you can bet if we get one he will be plugged right in. Hairston can play either side. I think he is better than Pears. If we get Martin we know what the starting O-line should look like, Pears will be good depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharebear Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 He has randle there and us not picking him?! then randle jeffery and quick go later? See.. we can't afford to wait for WR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 We may not need a starting LT but you can bet if we get one he will be plugged right in. Hairston can play either side. I think he is better than Pears. If we get Martin we know what the starting O-line should look like, Pears will be good depth. Didn't they just re-sign Pears for decent money? I think the Bills like Hairston at LT but might sign Martin to compete. Either way, we'd have some depth if Pears or Hairston went down. We can't do the Levitre to tackle experiment again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Martin IS a left tackle he needs to be in a weight conditioning program. I think he is the perfect pick in the 2nd round....and no we dont need a WR more then we need a OT. you can find WR's. Starting caliber LT's are hard to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.